MORE BS
More questions than answers. Who is the "WE"? Who and when was this approved, and by who? Where was the member input? Time schedule? All covenants or pick and choose?
If there was ever a reason to remove the entire Board, THIS IS IT! This could be acceptable if done after there was a complete review and revision of all covenants. AND if the members had approved by vote. For example, are they going to file a complaint on all property without an address posted? How about neat and tidy?
The place to start the inspections should be the Board Trustees and then all the committee members. How much member funds are and will be spent on this nonsense? Part time compliance person? Looks full time to me.
Compliance Update **************
Please be advised*************
We will be starting our new routine compliance routes. The HOA has been divided up into 10 Sections, which contain the Surfside Divisions.
The route was randomly drawn and will be done in the following order:
• Section 2 – Ocean Woods & Division 16
• Section 8 – Ocean Crest, Division 11 & 12 and Sunny Slopes
• Section 5 – Divisions 4, 5 & 6 and Surfview
• Section 7 – Divisions 9 & 10
• Section 4 – Divisions 7 & 8 and Division 13
• Section 3 – Divisions 1, 2 & 3
• Section 6 – Divisions 14 & 15
• Section 1 – Sea Dunes, Ocean Villa (also Replat of OV) and Beach Addition
• Section 9 – Division 17
• Section 10 – Divisions 18, 19 & 20
76 comments:
Has the association sent this information to ALL members in writing including answers to all the questions posed above? We know the answer to that don't we. We need to end this disturbing trend NOW!!!
VOTE FOR LARRY - JOHN - CORI - RONDA !!!!
Unbelievable, this needs to stop immediately.
Vote for RONDA CORI LARRY AND STEVE!
This is the pro-active compliance that was voted on during a regular meeting in 2019. I have never understood how a covenant could be changed so dramatically without a hearing and then a vote!
The enforcement of a covenant should always be assumed. Just like you can go over the speed limit most of the time but can't complain when you do get a ticket. I'm not saying it is right, just saying that enforcing the covenant is not a covenant change.
It might not be a covenant change but it is most certainly a SIGNIFICANT policy change. Member feedback was not solicited (it never is in any meaningful way). This "policy" has had and will continue to have dire consequences. The fact that this board is still unwilling to take a good hard look at the 50+ year old covenants is unacceptable. And has been stated, is also unwilling to communicate answers to the questions posed above regarding this so called "proactive" compliance policy.
The covenant was never proactive until this change. There is a big difference between the two and it should have been discussed more in my opinion
Hiring a PAID employee to do enforcement IS a covenant change.
I do not want to pay someone to harass us, EVER.........
Note to self...I was the only candidate who thinks covenant compliance should be complaint driven only. If it does not directly effect you, keep your nose out of it!
Oh just for the record, Laura Frazier did her job well. She handled complaints amongst everything else her job included. Now.... well, we are just paying more out in salaries with extra staff.
I miss Laura
You can thank Olds, deLeest and Williams for this. And throw in the board for letting it happen. All started out as tree topping compliance and when they got away with that, turned their attention to getting other covenant compliance. Lighting, etc. etc. All areas of Surfside look ok, with a few exceptions. Nothing that warrants a full harassment attack against the members. And we victims are paying for it. Not what we expected to be paying for.
The greedy power hungry selfish, started this because of their obsession with topping trees for their not so good view. Oh they said, pro-active will be more fair in everyone being screwed to top trees. The Board in their limited wisdon, bought the BS. This has only encourage more harassment on everything.
I agree that the complaint system should be member complaint only. It has worked fairly well for many years. What all of a sudden happened? I named them that happened above, plus others not named.
I do not see a bunch of law breaking members that want no covenants. Most want a "clean and green" community. Most favor simple common sense easy to understand and follow covenants. I am sick and tired of these so called do gooders imposing their selfish will on others. In my opinion, they are a disgrace to our community and have given us a bad name and reputation far and wide.
I do not agree with the above assessment of Laura. I delt with her while on and off the Board. I found her to have an attitude problem when dealing with members and anyone who had any criticism of anything she did. Barbra Robinson and Ken Karch, former General Managers, were excellent managers. Probably why they didn't last.
From what the current business manager has posted on this blog and on the official facebook page, I don't think she is too fond of constructive criticism either. She seems very defensive. Unfortunate.
The fact that the board thought turning Surfside into a police state was a good idea is just plain scary.
As JoAnne, this is just a continuation, not something new.
The main issue I had with the complaint system was that the person making the complaint was almost always seen as the bad guy, not the person who violated the covenant.
I do feel that just before the pro active started they should have reminded the membership that it was happening. Still it was published in the board minutes when it was approved and at that time there were still in person board meetings, so people did have the opportunity to voice there opinions. Problem was the majority don't pay attention.
Once again it’s the members fault! When you know there is a problem with communications, ideas and solutions are the best methods of informing us!
Yep it's always the members fault. HOA takes no responsibility to improve communication even though they have been told over and over again that's what is needed. Just take for example how well the last board meeting went. Can't imagine why people "don't pay attention".
Like I said before and I'll say it again, I don't feel like I own my property here. This HOA is in control of everything, including the damned water. We're screwed is something doesn't change. I'm voting for change and I hope the majority does too!
Otherwise, I keep adding to my attorney fund until I move in case I have to fight back!
Someone needs to start the process of ending this HOA. Enough is enough.
Yes, that attorney fund should easily be crossing the 100k mark by now...
My hunch is that nothing will change this election and maybe you may realize the 10 or so folks commenting here do not represent the majority.
@ 9:32
PLEASE GO FIND THE WILLIAMS AND J PLACERS BLOG TO COMMENT ON, you are just a pain in actual concerned members A**,
We want the members to have a voice, not just an elite group of maybe 15 people that have nothing in their lives other than to try and control people that just want a nice easy life at the beach. What brought you controlling people to this point in your lives? Was or is your job so horrible you need to control people, is your family life so bad you need to take your problems out on your neighbors? There are 2000+ members or this community, try just once to represent them all not just your elite, self serving group!
The majority is those who are forced to butcher trees, the majority are pretty much everyone with a porch light, the majority is everyone with driftwood landscape, the majority is those with buoys in their yard. @932, you are a petty, sad little person with soul of a dirt clod.
Go pound sand.
I told you that they are going around and it feels like they are stalking you. I sure hope that they have the ball's to stop and say something or give me a fine because my tree has 1 to many leaves on it. I will not be very nice and I will take them to court for harrassment.
Rhonda, Larry and Cori I voted for you!
Lost hope....did you send in the ballot that said vote for "3"? If so, that is the wrong ballot. You should have gotten a new ballot that said vote for "4". JOHN is the 4th NEW person to vote for.
Surfside would have been a better community if the covenants had been enforced throughout its existence. As it is, too many rule breaking members have believed that they could do whatever they wanted to do with no fuss or penalties. I strongly support the full and fair enforcement of the covenants with the goal to make this HOA a better and more attractive community. Those of us who have carefully abided by the covenants over our years in Surfside are frustrated and angry over the few who believe that they can do whatever the hell they want to with no regard for the fact that they bought into an HOA with rules. An improved regard for the defined rights and responsibilities of each member is a move toward better neighbors who can trust each other to live by the rules.
We hear this claim of widespread non-compliance, but no one can tell us what the violations are. Other than Tree cutting demands by the HOA, few violation notices go out.
Please name (6:43) three common violations that are not being addressed.I think you are imagining things going wrong when they are not.
There WILL BE a picnic following the annual meeting on July 10th at the business office. The CRC will provide hot dogs, sausage, burgers, chips, drinks and cake. No pot luck this year. Just come and mingle with other members. Enjoy!
Good morning. We all care for this community. Praying for honesty and integrity get restored!
@ steve, It would be nice to know what complaints other than trees are coming in.
For abandoned vehicles, this should fall under the sheriff. They should be tagging these vehicles, they have authority to write the affidavit.
Junk vehicles have to meet certain criteria to be "junk", not just because a neighbor claims it is. Again, Travis is the county code enforcement officier, he writes Junk vehicle affidavits and has a time limit to respond when a complaint comes in.
And this will be communicated to the members how???
If it's not posted on the blog, members are kept in the dark. They don't want members to know the truth about this corrupt HOA.
To 6:48am- Rules, rules, rules. Rules are for children and communism. We are adults and property owners. We all can make rules for our own four corners. The rules for your four corners are non of my business. I don't need busy bodies rewriting or adding to the rules to suit their tender eyes either. I don't work every day to pay another person to drive around and harass my neighbors with more and more rules. Your idea and my idea of a trusting neighbor are very very different. Sure glad you are not my neighbor.
Seriously, I can't even keep up on the laundry. If people around here have nothing better to do than worry about how tall someone else's tree is or the shape of someone else's house lights, they need to start living life! This is preposterous and beyond invading.
Get a life, soon, the clock is ticking.....
VOTE-CORI, JOHN, RONDA, LARRY
Kurt said it last summer. Go live your life!
June 26, 2021 at 6:48 AM assumes people are deliberately ignoring the covenants. This is simply not true. We had a complaint driven compliance enforcement policy so no one was ignoring anything. Until such time as a member received a notification, it is reasonable for them to assume they were not causing "harm" to another member. Members were expected to address complaints when notified. When the board decided to go to a pro-active enforcement policy it changed everything.
Too bad the board didn't solicit feedback on how best to manage this significant change to policy. Since the tree policy seems to be what they were focused on, the first step probably should have been to evaluate the tree covenant and determine what actually would benefit all members in light of the fact that this covenant has not been enforced effectively for decades. After that first step, the next should have been a discussion on how to implement the change so as to minimize destruction to the environment.
Now the board is wanting to change the lighting covenant and retroactively enforce it. The new lighting covenant language states the member has to change their current lighting fixtures if determined non-compliant. Will this be an example of members deliberately ignoring the covenants?
There are also examples of the HOA making decisions and then changing that decision later on. Is this an example of members deliberately ignoring covenants?
The truth is we are all subject to the whims of the changing board members. Steve Cox submitted a resolution to try to change this fact but was silenced.
Vote for NEW board members!!!! JOHN RONDA CORI LARRY
I have seen and talked with people who live here who are barely getting by. Some of these houses are in great disrepair due to limited income. I guess it's ok with current BOT/covenant supporters to watch these people incur fines and have their last asset get legal judgments against it, decimating what tiny bit of dignity they have left.
I guess you probably believe they shouldn't own a home to begin with right?Just don't buy your insulin this month Mr. Smith, oh you don't need that heart medication or that cancer surgery or gas to get there. Really Mrs. Jones, do you really need that food right there in your cart? Come on, fix your lights, cut your trees and stop being so rebellious and rude to us who want a view we are not entitled to.
I'm sick of these kind of people who only care about controlling others. Better watch out because I'm pissed off!
What is so troubling is the cruelness and lack of willingness to take a step back and be accepting of how this pro-active change has impacted our neighbor's lives and the environment as a whole. Whether or not you are for or against destroying all the "non-compliant" trees, why are we putting so much pressure and stress on these people? The trees have been ignored for more than 10-20 years. Why are we telling them to take care of it in such a short time frame? If they were allowed to remove a percentage over a longer period of time it would be less of a burden financially and more conducive to saving the environment. As Ronda stated, instead of a "destroy the trees committee" we should have a "help our neighbors committee" and a new approach.
And the lighting thing is ridiculous. The Long Beach peninsula, including Surfside, is NOT a dark sky community and never will be. A very simple wattage policy is more than sufficient.
George published the numbers tallied by the conpliance officer/bus. manager Laura a couple of years in a row, which is an interesting perspective on the "pro-active" approach, which goes out patroling for violations.
All that I recall specifically, is that Tree violations were around a hundred, with just a few different issues in single digits, around 5 or 6 lighting complaints received.
There have been around 300 Tree complaints/violations the last 2 years, but no one is publishing this as public information.
Our previous Bus. Manager had claimed there had been over 50 lighting complaints, until put on the spot, he admitted there were 5.
Williams was asked why a new covenant was needed, after the last one was tejected by the members. He said they'd received "a lot of complaints", giving no verification of it.
Members need to stop this bull !
Careful 2:48, your sounding to much like me. I agree with most of what you say, except the wattage. There are to many variable lighting needs to even have a wattage policy. All we need is a line saying..."be considerate of your neighbors with your outside lighting". Extreme unresolved lighting issues could be resolved on an individual case basis.
I love how this "no tree taller than the house" rule is making the interior hotter than hades today!
Other than bright spotlights that illuminate a large area, have whatever lights you like. Wattage restrictions would probably cover that requirement. If my neighbors want to have party lights on their patio or deck, I say enjoy. If I'm outside I'll enjoy them with you. If the lights are interfering with my star gazing, I'll call you and ask you to turn them off or I'll go down to the beach. And I have window coverings if lights should bother me when I'm inside my house. Really no need to make the lights so antagonistic and confrontational. The simpler the better. Leave people alone to live their life.
You're right George. Completely agree. I take back my wattage idea. :)
As you stated: "be considerate of your neighbors with your outside lighting". Extreme unresolved lighting issues could be resolved on an individual case basis.
If you compare the current lighting covenants to the proposed changes I do not see much difference. Frankly, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion about the comment in the board meeting regarding the HOA attorney.
because it makes no sense.
@3:34, oh there is a difference!!
Pay close attention to 2.17 d
This sentence gives them complete control of everyone's lights!!
I am not voting for the new lighting covenant, just so everyone knows. I do not believe 9 people should control our community.
GO LIVE YOUR LIFE AND ENJOY IT!!
PROPOSED Lighting Change 2021
2.17 Lighting and Exterior Signs-Except as otherwise specified in Section 2.17, ALL exterior lighting,
including but not limited to, parking lot lighting and lighted signs, must be designed and installed
with bulbs shielded and the fixtures aimed downward so that the bulb or other source of the
lighting is not visible beyond the property line of the parcel upon which the lighting is located. In
addition, motion sensor flood lights must turn off within 10 minutes after coming on and be aimed
so they do not cast across the owners property line. Exceptions to this requirement are as follows:
2.17 a. Holiday and similar low wattage lighting may be displayed on a parcel provided it does not
cause a nuisance or unreasonably interfere with use of any other property.
2.17 b. Safety and emergency lighting required by Federal, State or Local law is permitted so long as
such lighting complies with the requirements of Section 2.17 to maximum feasible extent consistent
with applicable law.
2.17 c. Existing lighting sources which do not comply with Section 2.17 must be brought into
conformance within six (6) months of a complaint being validated or upon transfer of the property.
2.17 d. THE BOARD MAY ADOPT RULES AND PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THIS SECTION!
CURRENT LIGHTING COVENANT
2.17 Lighting and Exterior Signs. Except as otherwise specified in this Section 2.17, all exterior
lighting, including, but not limited to, parking lot lighting and lighted signs, must be designed,
installed and/or shielded so that the bulb or other source of the lighting is not visible beyond the
property line of the parcel upon which the lighting is located. Exceptions to this requirement are as
follows:
2.17a Holiday and similar low wattage decorative lighting may be displayed on a parcel so long as it
does not cause a nuisance or unreasonably interfere with use on any other property.
2.17b Safety and emergency lighting required by federal, state or local law is permitted so long as
such lighting complies with the requirements of this Section 2.17 to the maximum feasible extent
consistent with applicable law.
2.17c Existing sources of lighting which do not comply with the provisions of this Section 2.17 must
be brought into conformance with the Surfside Covenants amended 8-18-18.doc 9 provisions of
this section upon the earlier to occur of substantial repair, modification or reconstruction of that
lighting or sale of the property upon which the lighting is located.
The covenant change will be discussed at the Annual Members Meeting in August
So if that comment was gone you would be ok with the proposed changes?
The requirements already exist so I would assume the board already can adopt rules and procedures regarding an existing covenant. To me it goes without saying. What extra power besides what is already written do you feel that sentence provides?
Simply another power grab by the same fools as last time.
We can either vote them out, or continue the insanity. Those are the choices. Better get motivated.
2.17 "c" as it is currently and proposed and "d" as it is proposed are both going to cause big problems due to proactive compliance. Just drive around Surfside and you will see there are hundreds of light fixtures that will not comply. This will initiate multiple complaints if enforced proactively and equally. Again the board is creating another monster.
If the HOA wants any type of restrictions on light fixtures, it should be FROM THIS POINT FORWARD on NEW CONTRUCTION. The Architecture Committee can approve before any money is spent. Everything that currently exists should be grandfathered.
The whole thing is ridiculous because of how it is worded. Light can't be visible beyond property line? Every light in existence is non-compliant.
Just a thought here...
What if a bunch of us get the brightest flashlight possible and walk down the street shining our flashlight it to the current bot house.
@4:52, oh no I would still not be okay with it.
2.17 is also worded currently to not go beyond property line. The new wording would be to also have bulbs facing downward. This would require many many residents to install new lights.
2.17 a, currently mentions decorative lighting may be displayed, but the word decorative has been removed in the new proposed covenant.
2.17 c currently is written to bring lights into compliance when you do a substantial repair, modification or reconstruct. NEW PROPOSAL IN BRING INTO COMPLIANCE WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF A COMPLAINT!
STOP THE NICKPICK MICROMANAGING
I WILL NOT VOTE FOR THIS IF ELECTED
Why have I seen Annette driving on I and G today? doesn't she live on J now? What in the world is she patrolling for. Stay in your own area and leave us alone!!
6:58 You are so right! Why are they driving around patrolling the neighborhood?
I have a neighbor in back of me that has their shed on the property line and the roof overhang is on my property roughly 12-18 inches. I caught them on my property cutting back all my trees and bushes by 15 feet from the property line. I simply told him that he is trespassing on my private property, He then replied that I was not being very neighborly. My reply was well next time I will show you my neighborly side with buckshot in his butt!
I am very tired of trespassers and the SHOA BOT and if I see anyone on my property from the SHOA BOT they will get the same warning and only once!
Wow you people are something else! She is campaigning! Get over it!
I am home all day every day, why hasn't anyone stopped to campaign then? I'm outside every day too, still not one peep from anyone. hmmmm, weird way to campaign.
@8:26 That doesn't seem like a neighborly way to resolve disputes.
@11:58 give me your address and I will be happy to come by and trespass on your property to see how you would like it.
Is it ok then in Surfside to just do what ever the hell you want on others property? Like I said give me your address and I will come by with my chainsaw and weed wacker and have a great time in your yard. Oh and then I will eat some food and throw the remaining leftovers in your yard to attract the bears too. If you call all of this neighborly then you need to lay off the sauce for a while!
No one should have a shed overhanging on your property. This needs to remedied. It is rude and illegal. Tell them to move the shed ASAP. As for pruning, if someone has a tree or bush overhanging, the correct thing to do would be for that owner to ask permission to come over and prune their tree AND take the cut branches with them.
Otherwise, you have every right to trim back A.N.Y.T.H.I.N.G. that hangs over onto your property line. Shed roof included.
Anyone who has lived somewhere a neighbor has imposed themselves onto you with their overreach, makes a person especially testy. I know, I use to have a neighbor who thought he owned everything within in his reach. It was very very unnerving and uncomfortable.
Unfortunate there isn't a way to resolve disputes for when neighbors don't work together...
Just gotta say: All this brouhaha is a foil for failure where it really matters: The Water. If the Board could provide clear water, without making excuses about the yellow crud being perfectly drinkable, then they would not have to make all this noise to put the members on the defensive about trees and lights. I think it would be more efficient to just attend to the water issues.
Yesterday afternoon and this morning, my water looks like diluted milk. What's that about and is it safe to drink? Division 14 and 15 by the compactor.
We never drink the water, don’t even give it to the dogs! Bottled water for drinking and cooking, only thing Surfside water is good for is watering trees, shrubs, and lawns. Oh and I guess for flushing the toilet, I don’t really even like showering in it. Makes my white tub look yellow, but heh it’s ok to drink per the Surfside experts!
We never drink or cook with the water either. And I'm with 9:37, really don't like showering in it. Throw in all the boil water events and I'm dismayed that the government agency overseeing water quality hasn't stepped in to protect us from the incompetent management.
The awful water is not because a lack of funding. We have spent millions and it is still not fit to drink. Replacing a mile of pipe a year will not improve the quality. Study after study and continual experimenting trying this and that has not worked. Why do we keep trying to fix things on the cheap and end up paying more? There must be someplace we can go and get honest answers and fix this mess.
We can join northbeach water and be on our own for garage and everyone goes on their merry way
Your comment is not well conceived. Any new property owner needs to discuss property lines before clearing bushes and such from adjacent property. This property has been discussed on the Blog recently, and the shed belonging to the new owner is built directly on the property line, with the eaves actually ON the neighbor's property.
Only a fool would make any assumptions about the property line without KNOWING. Had they talked to the neighbor before clearing, their neighbor, who has lived there a long time, could have given them info about the improperly located shed.
There's no excuse for not establishing contact with new neighbors, and working together when possible.
Agree with June 27, 2021 at 10:54 AM. The beach paths and foot bridges need to be maintained. Everything else can go.
Our water looks like it is already been used, the dumpster at the compactor site is full regularly, and we have no Sheriff right now.
Re-electing the people that put us in this position is the height of folly.
Too many members have constructed permanent (concrete holding posts) fences on property that does not belong to them. We would like to see the County and Surfside issue warnings and fines to get these maverick members under control. Amazing that they always make their property bigger, not smaller. Many encroaching on public access at front of their
property. Have an RV neighbor who regularly drives over neighbor across the street property to maneuver his trailer even though his fence in built many feet into public access property. Sick of looking at his ruthless disregard for rules and other's property.
I see lot's of things people do that are just wrong, whether legally or morally. I have found this was causing me great distress and emotional and mental anguish. I learned to ignore these offenses. Unless they trespass on me or mine, I have learned to ignore the behavior of other's because it will wear on your mind, body and soul. Other people are not mine to fix. Let them answer for their offenses and stay true to yourself.
That's called..."Taking the High Road". Nothing wrong with that.
First as I see it, if fences have to be approved, why is this the property owners fault? Wouldn't this be the fault of the architecture committee?
Second, I do not understand why we double up and pay for services twice. We need to let the county do their jobs. The county has a building inspector and a code enforcement officer. Let's start using them, we pay taxes for them. Instead we double up and pay surfside too.
Good point Ronda!
Throw the 1/2 million dollar deputy contract in the double pay column too. What a waste. Mark Scott said "would like to see a Tsunami Tower up on the hill". Does he want Surfside members to pay for that? Again, this is a county/state responsibility. STOP THE SPENDING!!! Have a goal of 10% budget REDUCTIONS every year just like other business have to do.
I just for a simple non scientific test went down to Jack’s and bought a white 5 gallon paint bucket.
At 9 am I filled it with water from my Surfside water supply, I don’t remember pouring a 2 litre bottle of Mountain Dew in the bucket before filling it but it looked like deluited pee water. Dumped the water at the base of my dwarf Maple tree.
Filled the bucket again at 12 pm, amazing same result and still don’t remember dumping in that bottle of Mountain Dew! Dumped that at the tree again.
About 4:30 pm filled the bucket once again, looked like this time I poured 1/2 gallon of milk in it this time. Double checked by dumping half the bucket into an orange Homer bucket (thinking white bucket) still looked like milk water.
Not exactly a scientific study but really we are supposed to drink this stuff? Get the water department in the control of someone that knows what they are doing. This is a major expenditure of this HOA and it’s needs to be right!!!
Recently, I have noticed a milky look to the water. Not sure if it's due to some of the pipe replacement or what but in the past have always enjoyed clear water here. Not sure what's going on, maybe time to call into the office?
My water is also milky looking. Never seen that in the 17 years I have been here. I hope it is ok to use as I don't have any bottled water but had to use it to take medicine and keep hydrated. It is also warmer than usual, which can be expected, but what does that do to the th levels? Has a test been taken?
Post a Comment